Historical comparative research
Encyclopedia
Historical comparative research is the study of past events and questions using methods in sociology and other social scientific research to inform the possible outcomes and answers to current events and questions. Beginning in the late 1950s, the discipline of history became more linked with sociology. Eventually historical sociology
was accepted as a more concrete perspective during the 1970s. Historical investigations are based on the remnants of the past called historical material, which include official documents, diaries and much more as is discussed below. Comparative sociology
on the other hand, specifically looks at sociology across regions or nations. Historical comparative sociology differs from historical sociology
by focusing on three main issues: causal relationships, processes over time and comparisons.
and Theda Skocpol
based their "theoretical insights" on Karl Marx
, Weber and even Alexis de Tocqueville
over Durkheim. Durkheim's work has important contributions to historical-comparative research despite being looked over and dismissed, historically, in relation to this field. Emirbayer suggests that Durkheim's work on civil society, analyses of the family, schooling, professional bodies and the public sphere aid historical-comparative sociology and his work overall "sheds light" on some of the recurring issues in this field.
Max Weber
defined the early development of historical comparative research with his broad ranging comparisons of religious and economic systems around the world. For example, one of his most famous works The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism
examines the cultural differences between China and that of Western Europe. Other examples of his work and comparisons of religions including Hinduism, and Ancient Judaism. He propositioned that Protestantism has "The Spirit of Capitalism". More recent major figures include Barrington Moore whose work on the origins of different types of states inspired, notably by Theda Skocpol major book on states and social revolutions. That research inspired some of the major substantive and methodological debates in historical research during recent decades. More recently, researchers including; Theda Skocpol, Somers, Kiser and Hechter have argued about the theoretical basis of explanation in historical comparative research.
There are four stages, as discusses by Schutt, to systematic qualitative comparative historical studies; (1) Development of the premise of the investigation, identifying events/concepts, etc that may explain the phenomena; (2) Choose the case(s) (location- nation, region) to examine (3) Using what Theda Skocpol has termed as "interpretive historical sociology" and examine the similarities and the differences; (4) finally based on the information gathered propose a casual explanation for the phenomena.
The key issues in methods for historical comparative research stem from the incomplete nature of historical data, the complexity and scale of the social systems, and the nature of the questions asked. Historical data is a difficult set of data to work with due to multiple factors. This data set can be very biased, such as diaries, memoirs, letters, which are all influenced not only by the person writing them, that person's world view but can also, logically, be linked to that individual's socioeconomic status. In this way the data can be corrupt/skewed. Historical data regardless or whether it may or may not be biased (diaries vs. official documents) is also vulnerable to time. Time can destroy fragile paper, fade ink until it is illegible, wars, environmental disasters can all destroy data and special interest groups can destroy mass amounts of data to serve a specific purpose at the time they lived, etc. Hence, data is naturally incomplete and can lead social scientists to many barriers in their research. Often historical comparative research is a broad and wide reaching topic such as how democracy evolved in three specific regions. Tracking how democracy developed is a daunting task for one country or region let alone three. Here the scale of the social system, which is attempting to be studied, is overwhelming but also the complexity is extreme. Within each case there are multiple different social systems that can effect the development of a society and its political system. The factors must be separated and analyzed so that causality can be attained. It is causality that brings us to yet another key issue in methods for historical comparative research, the nature of the questions which are asked are attempting to propose causal relationships between a set of variables. Determining causality alone is a difficult task; coupled with the incomplete nature of historical data and the complexity and scale of the social systems being used to examine causality the task becomes even more challenging.
John Stuart Mill
devised five methods by which people are able to systematically analyze their observations and make more accurate assumptions about causality. Mill's Methods
discusses; direct method of agreement, method of difference, joint method of agreement and difference, method of residues and method of concomitant variations. Some issues with this aspect of historical comparative research are that the Mill's methods are typically the most useful when the causal relationship is already suspected and can therefore be a tool for eliminating other explanations. Mill's methods simply cannot provide proof that the variation in one variable was caused by the variation of another variable.
Something about each of these three. How do we tell when we have sufficient evidence to impute a causal relationship? How best can we model processes unfolding over time? On what basis can we identify appropriate comparisons?
, who sides with the historical approach, and Kiser and Hechter, who are proponents of the scientific view that should search for general causal principles. Both Kiser and Hechter employ models within Rational Choice Theory
for their general causal principles. Historical researchers that oppose them (Skocpol, Summers, others) argue that Kiser and Hechter do not suggest many other plausible general theories, and thus it seems as though their advocacy for general theories is actually advocacy for their preferred general theory. They also raise other criticisms of using rational choice theory in historical comparative research.
Historical sociology
Historical sociology is a branch of sociology focusing on how societies develop through history. It looks at how social structure that many regard as natural are in fact shaped by complex social processes...
was accepted as a more concrete perspective during the 1970s. Historical investigations are based on the remnants of the past called historical material, which include official documents, diaries and much more as is discussed below. Comparative sociology
Comparative sociology
Comparative sociology generally refers to sociological analysis that involves comparison of social processes between nation-states, or across different types of society ....
on the other hand, specifically looks at sociology across regions or nations. Historical comparative sociology differs from historical sociology
Historical sociology
Historical sociology is a branch of sociology focusing on how societies develop through history. It looks at how social structure that many regard as natural are in fact shaped by complex social processes...
by focusing on three main issues: causal relationships, processes over time and comparisons.
Major researchers
Leading historical-comparative sociologist in America during the mid-1960s into the 1980s, predominantly Barrington Moore, Jr., Charles TillyCharles Tilly
Charles Tilly was an American sociologist, political scientist, and historian who wrote on the relationship between politics and society. He was the Joseph L. Buttenwieser Professor of Social Science at Columbia University....
and Theda Skocpol
Theda Skocpol
Theda Skocpol is an American sociologist and political scientist at Harvard University. She served from 2005 to 2007 as Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. She is influential in sociology as an advocate of the historical-institutional and comparative approaches, and well-known in...
based their "theoretical insights" on Karl Marx
Karl Marx
Karl Heinrich Marx was a German philosopher, economist, sociologist, historian, journalist, and revolutionary socialist. His ideas played a significant role in the development of social science and the socialist political movement...
, Weber and even Alexis de Tocqueville
Alexis de Tocqueville
Alexis-Charles-Henri Clérel de Tocqueville was a French political thinker and historian best known for his Democracy in America and The Old Regime and the Revolution . In both of these works, he explored the effects of the rising equality of social conditions on the individual and the state in...
over Durkheim. Durkheim's work has important contributions to historical-comparative research despite being looked over and dismissed, historically, in relation to this field. Emirbayer suggests that Durkheim's work on civil society, analyses of the family, schooling, professional bodies and the public sphere aid historical-comparative sociology and his work overall "sheds light" on some of the recurring issues in this field.
Max Weber
Max Weber
Karl Emil Maximilian "Max" Weber was a German sociologist and political economist who profoundly influenced social theory, social research, and the discipline of sociology itself...
defined the early development of historical comparative research with his broad ranging comparisons of religious and economic systems around the world. For example, one of his most famous works The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism
The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism
The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism is a book written by Max Weber, a German economist and sociologist. It was first published in German under the title Konfuzianismus und Taoismus in 1915 and an adapted version appeared in 1920...
examines the cultural differences between China and that of Western Europe. Other examples of his work and comparisons of religions including Hinduism, and Ancient Judaism. He propositioned that Protestantism has "The Spirit of Capitalism". More recent major figures include Barrington Moore whose work on the origins of different types of states inspired, notably by Theda Skocpol major book on states and social revolutions. That research inspired some of the major substantive and methodological debates in historical research during recent decades. More recently, researchers including; Theda Skocpol, Somers, Kiser and Hechter have argued about the theoretical basis of explanation in historical comparative research.
Methods
There are four major methods that researchers use to collect historical data. These are archival data, secondary sources, running records, and recollections. The archival data, or primary sources, are typically the resources that researchers rely most heavily on. Archival data includes official documents and other items that would be found in archives, museums, etc. Secondary sources are the works of other historians who have written history. Running records are ongoing series of statistical or other sorts of data, such as Census data, ship's registries, property deeds, etc. Finally recollections include sources such as autobiographies, memoirs or diaries.There are four stages, as discusses by Schutt, to systematic qualitative comparative historical studies; (1) Development of the premise of the investigation, identifying events/concepts, etc that may explain the phenomena; (2) Choose the case(s) (location- nation, region) to examine (3) Using what Theda Skocpol has termed as "interpretive historical sociology" and examine the similarities and the differences; (4) finally based on the information gathered propose a casual explanation for the phenomena.
The key issues in methods for historical comparative research stem from the incomplete nature of historical data, the complexity and scale of the social systems, and the nature of the questions asked. Historical data is a difficult set of data to work with due to multiple factors. This data set can be very biased, such as diaries, memoirs, letters, which are all influenced not only by the person writing them, that person's world view but can also, logically, be linked to that individual's socioeconomic status. In this way the data can be corrupt/skewed. Historical data regardless or whether it may or may not be biased (diaries vs. official documents) is also vulnerable to time. Time can destroy fragile paper, fade ink until it is illegible, wars, environmental disasters can all destroy data and special interest groups can destroy mass amounts of data to serve a specific purpose at the time they lived, etc. Hence, data is naturally incomplete and can lead social scientists to many barriers in their research. Often historical comparative research is a broad and wide reaching topic such as how democracy evolved in three specific regions. Tracking how democracy developed is a daunting task for one country or region let alone three. Here the scale of the social system, which is attempting to be studied, is overwhelming but also the complexity is extreme. Within each case there are multiple different social systems that can effect the development of a society and its political system. The factors must be separated and analyzed so that causality can be attained. It is causality that brings us to yet another key issue in methods for historical comparative research, the nature of the questions which are asked are attempting to propose causal relationships between a set of variables. Determining causality alone is a difficult task; coupled with the incomplete nature of historical data and the complexity and scale of the social systems being used to examine causality the task becomes even more challenging.
Identifying features
The three identifying issues of historical comparative research are causal relationships, processes over time, and comparisons. As mentioned above causal relationships are difficult to support although we make causal assumptions daily. Schutt discusses the five criteria, which must be met in order to have a causal relationship. Of the five the first three are the most important: association, time order and nonspuriousness. Association simply means that between two variables; the change in one variable is related to the change in another variable. Time order refers to the fact that the cause (the independent variable) must be shown to have occurred first and the effect (the dependent variable) to have occurred second. Nonspuriousness says that the association between two variables is not because of a third variable. The final two criteria are; identifying a causal mechanism- how the connection/association among variables is thought to have occurred- and the context in which this association occurs. The deterministic causal approach requires that in every study, the independent and dependent variable have an association, and within that study every case (nation, region) the independent variable has an effect on the dependent variable.John Stuart Mill
John Stuart Mill
John Stuart Mill was a British philosopher, economist and civil servant. An influential contributor to social theory, political theory, and political economy, his conception of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state control. He was a proponent of...
devised five methods by which people are able to systematically analyze their observations and make more accurate assumptions about causality. Mill's Methods
Mill's Methods
Mill's Methods are five methods of induction described by philosopher John Stuart Mill in his 1843 book A System of Logic. They are intended to illuminate issues of causation.-Direct method of agreement:...
discusses; direct method of agreement, method of difference, joint method of agreement and difference, method of residues and method of concomitant variations. Some issues with this aspect of historical comparative research are that the Mill's methods are typically the most useful when the causal relationship is already suspected and can therefore be a tool for eliminating other explanations. Mill's methods simply cannot provide proof that the variation in one variable was caused by the variation of another variable.
Something about each of these three. How do we tell when we have sufficient evidence to impute a causal relationship? How best can we model processes unfolding over time? On what basis can we identify appropriate comparisons?
Difficulties
There are several difficulties that historical comparative research faces. James Mahoney, one of the current leading figures in historical comparative research, identifies several of these in his book "Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences." Mahoney highlights key issues such as how micro level studies can be incorporated into the macro level field of historical comparative research, issues ripe for historical comparative research that continue to remain overlooked, such as law, and the issue of whether historical comparative research should be approached as a science or approached as a history. This is one of the more prevalent debates today, often debated between Theda SkocpolTheda Skocpol
Theda Skocpol is an American sociologist and political scientist at Harvard University. She served from 2005 to 2007 as Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. She is influential in sociology as an advocate of the historical-institutional and comparative approaches, and well-known in...
, who sides with the historical approach, and Kiser and Hechter, who are proponents of the scientific view that should search for general causal principles. Both Kiser and Hechter employ models within Rational Choice Theory
Rational choice theory
Rational choice theory, also known as choice theory or rational action theory, is a framework for understanding and often formally modeling social and economic behavior. It is the main theoretical paradigm in the currently-dominant school of microeconomics...
for their general causal principles. Historical researchers that oppose them (Skocpol, Summers, others) argue that Kiser and Hechter do not suggest many other plausible general theories, and thus it seems as though their advocacy for general theories is actually advocacy for their preferred general theory. They also raise other criticisms of using rational choice theory in historical comparative research.
Role of general theory
In recent decades historical comparative researchers have debated the proper role of general theory. Two of the main players in this debate have been Edgar Kiser and Michael Hechter. They have argued that it is important to use a general theory in order to be able to test the results of the research that has been conducted. They do not argue that one specific theory is better than the other just that a theory needs to be used. Their chosen theory is rational choice. One of the main problems is that everyone has a different concept of what a theory is and what makes something a theory. Some of their opponents feel that any theory can be tested and they are arguing that some can not be. Kiser and Hecter do acknowledge that this is a growing field and that their perspective may change in the future.Other reading
- Kiser, E. & Hechter, M. (1998) The Debate on Historical Sociology: Rational Choice Theory and Its Critics.http://www.library.ohiou.edu:5334/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=4&sid=68325436-e2a7-49a3-af79-64a14dccafd6%40sessionmgr3 American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 104 Issue 3, p785-816, 32p; (AN 2147972)
- Deflem, Mathieu. 2007. “Useless Tilly (et al.): Teaching Comparative-Historical Sociology Wisely.” http://www.cas.sc.edu/socy/faculty/deflem/zuseless.html Trajectories, Newsletter of the ASA Comparative & Historical Sociology section, 19(1):14-17.